DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed July 16th, 2026 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed April 20th, 2026.
The rejection of claim 5 under 35 USC § 112(d) is withdrawn due to applicant cancelling claim 5.
Claim Comments
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is confusing and it is not readily apparent as to the structure of how the second pipe, the heated water tank, the exhaust pipe and the humidifier tank are connected. For example, the last six lines of the claim recite that the exhaust pipe is connected to the heater water tank OR the humidifier tank, but then recites that the exhaust pipe is connected to the second pipe which would appear that the exhaust pipe vents the heater water tank AND the humidifier tank. This could lead to indefiniteness in the claim.
In order to avoid confusion and uncertainty in the structure of the claim, the examiner suggests amending the claim to provide structural clarity of the device. The examiner suggests the following amendment which is how the claim is interpreted for examination purposes:
A humidifier comprising:
a heating water tank;
a heater configured to heat water stored in the heating water tank;
a humidifying water tank configured to generate humified air;
a first connection pipe, wherein a first end of the first connection pipe is connected to the heating water tank and a second end of the first connection pipe is connected to a humidifying water tank, the first connection pipe is configured to send water stored in the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank;
a second connection pipe, wherein a first end of the second connection pipe is connected to the heating water tank, a second end of the second connection pipe is connected to the humidifying water tank, and a third end of the second connection pipe exits the humidifying water tank at an upper side of the humidifying water tank, the third end of the second connection pipe is configured to provide a flow path for the humidified air generated in the humidifying water tank and humidified air in the heating water tank;
an exhaust pipe, wherein a first end of the exhaust pipe is connected to the third end of the second connection pipe and a second end of the exhaust pipe is connected to a discharge passage, the exhaust pipe is configured to discharge the humidified air from the heating water tank and the humidified air from the humidifying water tank.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12, “the second connector” and “the air supply duct” lack antecedent basis. These elements are not present in claim 1, on which claim 12 depends upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 20210190341 A1 in view of Higashiyama US 20220235952 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Lee et al. teaches a humidifier represented by humidifier 100 (Fig. 1, [0040]). Humidifier 100 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A humidifying water tank which is connected to the heating water tank and generates humidified air by using water supplied from the heating water tank represented by humidifying member 110 (Fig. 1, [0040]).
A first connection pipe which sends water stored in the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank represented by pipe 13 and circulating pump 135 wherein “the circulating pump 135 is “[configured] for supplying water….to the humidifying member 110…connected through a pipe 13” (Fig. 1, [0047]).
A second connection pipe which is connected such that humidified air generated in the heating water tank flow into the humidified water tank represented by pipe 14 wherein pipe 14 “forms a flow passage through which water not vaporized in the humidifying member 110 is recovered to the circulating water tank 130” (Fig. 1, [0049]). The reference is silent as to humidified air generated in the heating water tank flowing into the humidified water tank, however the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). Furthermore, the pipe 14 could inherently send humidified air generated in the heating water tank to the humidified water tank as the pipe clearly connects both tanks.
Lee et al. fails to teach the following elements:
a heating water tank which heats water
a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank
and an exhaust pipe which discharges the humidified air existing inside the humidifying water tank to the outside.
Higashiyama teaches a heating water tank which heats water and a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank represented by heater 71 and tank 72 where in “the heater 71 heats water in the tank 72” (Fig. 3, [0051]). The heating water tank is beneficial to store water at an elevated temperature to help speed up the humidifying process.
Higashiyama also teaches an exhaust pipe which discharges the humidified air existing inside the humidifying water tank to the outside represented by third lead out portion 150 and air tube 91 where in “air humidified in the humidifier 170 is fed from the third lead out portion 150….through the air tube 91 “ to outside of the humidifier (Fig. 10, [0091]). The exhaust pipe is beneficial to help direct the humidified air to a desired location.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. to incorporate the teachings of Higashiyama to include a heating water tank to store water at an elevated temperature and an exhaust pipe to help direct the humidified air to a desired location.
Regarding claim 2, Lee et al. teaches the first connection pipe and the second connection pipe being arranged to be vertically spaced apart as seen in Figure. 1 where pipe 13 is vertically above pipe 14. Furthermore, having the pipes vertically spaced apart is a simply a design choice and would not modify the operation of the device. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have made the first connection pipe and the second connection pipe arranged to be vertically spaced apart for the simplification of the device.
Regarding claim 3, Lee et al. teaches the first connection pipe to be longer than the second connection pipe as seen in Figure. 1 where pipe 13 is clearly shown to be longer than pipe 14. Furthermore, the pipes having different lengths is a simply a design choice and would not modify the operation of the device. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as changes in size/proportion, are valid rejections in re Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have made the first connection pipe longer than the second connection pipe for aesthetic purposes.
Regarding claim 4, Lee et al. teaches the second connection pipe comprising a first end hole connected to the heating water tank and a second end hole connected to the humidifying water tank where in the second end hole is disposed in an upper side of the first end hole as shown in Figure 1 where the first end hole is represented by the connection of pipe 14 to the circulating water tank 130 and the second end hole is represented by the connection of pipe 14 to the humidifying member 110. The second end hole is clearly shown to be disposed in an upper side of the first end hole.
Regarding claim 6, Higashiyama teaches the exhaust pipe extending downward from an upper surface of the humidifying water tank where in a lower hole is opened in an up down direction is formed at a lower end of the exhaust pipe as shown in Figure 7 where air tube 91 is clearly extending downward from an upper surface of the device. Furthermore, air tube 91 is shown to be connected to mask 92 via a hole at its lower end.
Regarding claim 14, Lee et al. teaches a humidifier represented by humidifier 100 (Fig. 1, [0040]). Humidifier 100 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A water tank which stores water represented by storage water tank 120 and residual water tank 140 (Fig. 1, [0040]).
A humidifying water tank which is supplied from the heating water tank and generates humidified air by using water supplied from the heating water tank represented by humidifying member 110 (Fig. 1, [0040]). The reference is silent as to the humidifying water tank being disposed on a lower side of the water tank however that is simply a design choice and would not modify the operation of the device. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
A first connection pipe which sends water stored in the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank represented by pipe 13 and circulating pump 135 wherein “the circulating pump 135 is “[configured] for supplying water….to the humidifying member 110…connected through a pipe 13” (Fig. 1, [0047]).
A second connection pipe which is connected such that humidified air generated in the heating water tank flow into the humidified water tank represented by pipe 14 wherein pipe 14 “forms a flow passage through which water not vaporized in the humidifying member 110 is recovered to the circulating water tank 130” (Fig. 1, [0049]). The reference is silent as to humidified air generated in the heating water tank flowing into the humidified water tank , however the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). Furthermore, the pipe 14 could inherently send humidified air generated in the heating water tank to the humidified water tank as the pipe clearly connects both tanks.
An exhaust pipe which discharges water vapor generated in the heating water tank or the humidified air generated in the humidifying water tank to the lower side of the water tank represented by pipes 15 and 16 wherein “the drainage member 136 may selectively discharge water accommodated in the circulating water tank 130 to the residual water tank 140…the circulating water tank 130 and the drainage member 136 may be connected through a pipe 15, and the drainage member 136 and the residual water tank 140 may be connected through a pipe 16” (Fig. 1, [0051-0052]). The reference is silent as to water vapor generated in the heating water tank being discharged, however the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). Furthermore, pipes 15 and 16 could inherently discharge water vapor generated in the heating water tank to the water tank as the pipes clearly connect both tanks.
Lee et al. fails to teach a heating water tank disposed in a lower side of the water tank which forms a heating chamber for heating water supplied from the water tank or a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank.
Higashiyama teaches a heating water tank disposed in a lower side of the water tank which forms a heating chamber for heating water supplied from the water tank and a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank represented by heater 71 and tank 72 where in “the heater 71 heats water in the tank 72” (Fig. 3, [0051]). The heater 71 is beneficial to heat water to an elevated temperature and commence the humidifying process. The reference is silent as to the heating water tank being disposed in a lower side of the water tank, however, that is simply a design choice and would not modify the operation of the device. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. to incorporate the teachings of Higashiyama to include a heating water tank to heat water to an elevated temperature and to locate the heating water tank on the lower side of the water tank for simplification of the device.
Regarding claim 15, Lee et al. teaches a discharge guider spaded apart from an outer circumference of the water tank through which the humidified air discharged from the exhaust pipe flows is formed between the discharge guider and the water tank represented by drainage member 136 “the drainage member 136 may selectively discharge water accommodated in the circulating water tank 130 to the residual water tank 140…the circulating water tank 130 and the drainage member 136 may be connected through a pipe 15, and the drainage member 136 and the residual water tank 140 may be connected through a pipe 16” (Fig. 1, [0051-0052]).
Regarding claim 20, Lee et al. teaches a humidifier represented by humidifier 100 (Fig. 1, [0040]). Humidifier 100 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A humidifying water tank which is connected to the heating water tank and generates humidified air by using water supplied from the heating water tank represented by humidifying member 110 (Fig. 1, [0040]).
A first connection pipe which sends water stored in the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank represented by pipe 13 and circulating pump 135 wherein “the circulating pump 135 is “[configured] for supplying water….to the humidifying member 110…connected through a pipe 13” (Fig. 1, [0047]).
A second connection pipe which is connected such that humidified air generated in the heating water tank flow into the humidified water tank represented by pipe 14 wherein pipe 14 “forms a flow passage through which water not vaporized in the humidifying member 110 is recovered to the circulating water tank 130” (Fig. 1, [0049]). The reference is silent as to humidified air generated in the heating water tank flowing into the humidified water tank , however the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). Furthermore, the pipe 14 could inherently send humidified air generated in the heating water tank to the humidified water tank as the pipe clearly connects both tanks.
Lee et al. fails to teach a heating water tank which heats water, a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank, and an exhaust pipe which discharges the humidified air existing inside the heating water tank to the outside.
Higashiyama teaches a heating water tank which heats water and a heater which heats water stored in the heating water tank represented by heater 71 and tank 72 where in “the heater 71 heats water in the tank 72” (Fig. 3, [0051]). The heater 71 is beneficial to store water at an elevated temperature to help speed up the humidifying process.
Higashiyama also teaches an exhaust pipe which discharges the humidified air existing inside the heating water tank to the outside represented by third lead out portion 150 and air tube 91 where in “air humidified in the humidifier 170 is fed from the third lead out portion 150….through the air tube 91 “ to outside of the humidifier (Fig. 10, [0091]). The third lead out portion 150 is beneficial to help direct the humidified air to a desired location.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. to incorporate the teachings of Higashiyama to include a heating water tank to store water at an elevated temperature and an exhaust pipe to help direct the humidified air in the heating water tank to a desired location.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 20210190341 A1 in view of Higashiyama US 20220235952 A1 and in further view of Kim et al. US 20150068962 A1.
Regarding claim 9, Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama does not teach a floating valve which controls water levels of the heating water tank and the humidifying water tank where in the first connections pipe is located lower than the area where the floating valve moves and the second connection pipe being located higher than the area where the floating valve moves.
Kim et al. teaches a floating valve which controls water levels of the heating water tank and the humidifying water tank represented by floating valve 126 where in the floating valve “[controls] the water feeding unit to open or close according to the location” (Fig. 1B, [0013, 0068]). The floating valve 126 is beneficial to help control the amount of water in the heating water tank.
The reference is silent as to the first connection pipe at a location lower than the area where the floating valve operates and the second connection pipe at a location higher than where the floating valve operates. However, it is well known in the art that a floating valve operates by regulating the flow of liquids based on the liquid level in a tank. Arranging the pipes in this manner is simply a design choice. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04). Therefore, it would have been obvious to dispose the first connection pipe at a location lower than the area where the floating valve operates to ensure water is always flowing from the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank as any area below where the floating valve operates will always contain water. Conversely, placing the second connection pipe above the area where the floating valve operates ensures water never flows from the heating water tank to the humidifying water tank via the second connection pipe as any area above where the floating valve operates will not contain water.
It would be have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. in view of Higashiyama to incorporate the teachings of Kim et al. to include a floating valve in the heating water tank to help control the water level in the heating water tank and to dispose the first connection pipe below the area in which the floating valve operates to ensure water always flows between the heating water tank and the humidifying water tank and to dispose the second connection pipe above the area in which the heating water tank operates to ensure water cannot flow between the heating water tank and the humidifying water tank via the second connection pipe.
Claims 10, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 20210190341 A1 in view of Higashiyama US 20220235952 A1 and in further view of Armstrong US 2236359 A.
Regarding claim 10, Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Lee et al. does teach a fan where in the “fan is configured to blow air toward the humidifying member 110” (Abstract). However, Lee et al. is silent as to the air supply pipe.
Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama does not teach an air supply pipe which supplies air flowing by a blower into the humidifying water tank.
Armstrong teaches an air supply pipe and a blower represented by “air intake pipe 26 which extends from any suitable source of air supply” and blower 27 (pg. 4). The air supply pipe is beneficial to help guide the air from the blower in the desired direction.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. in view of Higashiyama to incorporate the teachings of Armstrong to include an air supply pipe to help guide air from the blower in the desired direction.
Regarding claim 11, Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama and in further view of Armstrong is silent as to the exhaust pipe being disposed between the air supply pipe and the first connection pipe.
However, Figure 1 of Lee et al. shows the first connection pipe (pipe 13) being connected at the top of the humidifying water tank (humidifying member 110) and the fan in the middle of the humidifying water tank). Furthermore, Lee et al. states “many alternatives, modifications, and variations” can be made as to the design of the invention [0160]. Therefore, placing the exhaust pipe between the first connection pipe and the air supply line is simply design choice and would not modify the operation of the device. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have made the exhaust pipe be disposed between the air supply pipe and the first connection for the simplification of the device.
Regarding claim 13, Lee et al. in view of Higashiyama and in further view of Armstrong teaches all the limitations of claim 10.
Armstrong teaches the air supply pipe having a supply pipe outlet represented by “air intake pipe 26 which extends from any suitable source of air supply” and “opens into the compartment 24” (pg. 4). Therefore, the air intake pipe 26 of the reference clearly has a supply pipe outlet. The supply pipe outlet of the air supply pipe is beneficial to help guide the air from the blower in the desired direction.
The reference is silent as to the supply pipe outlet of the air supply pipe being opened toward a circumferential surface of the exhaust pipe. However, this is simply a design choice and would not modify the operation of the device or produce a new or unexpected result. The courts have previously stated obvious matters of design choice, such as rearrangement of parts, are valid rejections in re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee at al. in view of Higashiyama to incorporate the teachings of Armstrong to include the supply pipe outlet of the air supply pipe being opened toward a circumferential surface of the exhaust pipe to help guide air from the blower in the desired direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 7 would be allowable as the prior art fails to teach a middle hole opened in a direction facing the second connection pipe formed in one side of a circumferential surface of the exhaust pipe.
Claim 8 would be allowable as the prior art fails to teach a groove recessed upwardly in a direction in which the second connection pipe is disposed, formed at a lower end of peripheral wall of the exhaust pipe.
Claim 16 would be allowable as the prior art fails to teach the discharge guide comprising: an inner guider disposed to be spaced apart from the outer circumference of the water tank and a lower guide wall which is disposed in a lower side of the inner guider, and forms an inclined surface toward the exhaust pipe.
Claims 17-19 are allowable.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 17 is allowed provided clarification is added to the claim to address confusion as to the structure.
Claim 18 is allowed as the prior art fails to teach all the limitations of claim 17 as well as the height of the second connection pipe increasing as it moves away from each of the humidifying water tank and the heating water tank.
Claim 19 is allowed as the prior art fails to teach all the limitations of claim 17 as well as the second connection pipe being located at an uppermost end in a point of being connected to the exhaust pipe.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 16th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1-6, 9, 14-15, and 20, the applicant argues that the art of Lee is non-analogous due to being a natural evaporative humidifier unlike the humidifier of the current invention. This argument is moot as the claims do not specify the type of humidifier or how the humidifier operates; therefore, any device which produces humidified air would satisfy the requirements as a basis for the rejections.
Furthermore, the arguments regarding the references filing to teach the dual path connection structure is also moot as the claims do not clearly establish this structure. The references clearly teach the elements as defined by the claims and combining the known elements of the various references would not produce a new or unexpected result.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMMAD BUTT whose telephone number is (571)272-6550. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMMAD W BUTT/ Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights